What are genetically modified foods
To gain a clear understanding of this argument, it is pertinent to have a clear understanding of which foods are termed as genetically engineered and the process through which they are made. With this information, it is also possible to differentiate them from the organic and naturally occurring foods. Genetic modification entails altering the genetic composition of an organism. Genetically modified foods result from a combination of genes from different organisms (plants, animals or bacteria). The foods are also referred to as genetically engineered foods or transgenic (Human Genome project Information, para 1).
Other than introducing foreign genes in an organism to end up with a genetically modified food, it is also possible to obtain the same by rearranging the existing genes such that new characteristics are expressed on the original organism. Genetic modification is done using molecular tools. There are several foods that have undergone genetic modifications including tomatoes that have been made such that they delay in ripening as with the case of the Flavr SavrTM Tomato that contain a gene that helps the cell wall remain stable making the tomato remain firm for shipping and long storage (Schneider Schneider, para 2). Other foods have been modified to resist pests whereas others have had their nutritional value added.
A clear point to note is that genetically modified foods date back to the ancient days whereby genetic alterations resulted from the practice hybridization and traditional breeding. The only difference with modern modifications is the use of recombinant technology in the process of recombinant DNA technology.
Have you ever consumed a genetically modified food
Most likely you have consumed a genetically modified food with or without your knowledge. In any case, settled agriculture has been in practice in the last 8000 years ago and selective breeding was in practice then with farmers going for disease and pest resistant crops (McLean, para 3). Even in the current era of modern biotechnology, most of us have consumed these modified foods. With 252 million acres of genetically modified crops being planted in 22 countries by year 2006, it is likely that you could have used one of these foods. The United States had a 57 percent contribution followed by Argentina which took a share of 17. South Africa contributed a one percent production of the GM products in the same year (Human Genome project Information, para 5). This technology has helped in meeting the challenge of food in the globe without any considerable risk being mentioned with their consumption. Why then should we not continue consuming the genetically modified foods if for centuries we have been safe with their consumption
A case for use of genetically modified foods
The debate against the use of GM food is not well founded and overlooks several existing facts. In actual sense, fighting the use of genetic food is a brutal refusal of accepting reality. Other than establishing that we have been consuming genetically altered foods over the decades without any harm, its point blank that the existing controversies are more of technical and procedural problems and not safety problems.
A section of people argue that the transgene (foreign gene in a new organism) is toxic and that it can be transferred to the consumer. The fact is that every day we take up not less than 0.1 to 1 germ of DNA in our meals. A transgene in a GM food would therefore not be new to our system. Furthermore, the transgene is also in insignificant small amounts. Studies also show that foreign DNA introduced through the diet is not directly toxic. Instead, the foreign DNA has been found to be helpful in the functioning of the gut and the immune system. Why then should we think that consuming food products that have been modified will lead to the incorporation of the foreign genes in our genomes In any case, foreign DNA would be broken down by defense mechanisms such as hydrolytic breakdown, excision and silencing of the foreign gene via DNA methylation thus avoiding incorporation and expression in the consuming organism (Hollingworth et al, p 3). The above facts show that the possibility of undesirable effects coming up due to existence of foreign DNA in foods is negligible.
We recognize that genetically modified foods may have increased risk of developing allergies or heighten allergic reactions in already susceptible individuals (Whitman, para 7). Why are the anti-GMOs focusing on this issue while it is well known that even conventional foods also cause allergies Upon introduction, the kiwi fruit in the United States and Europe in the 1960s, the kiwi fruit did not bring any allergies but has currently caused allergies in some people (Winter Gallegos, p 1). It is needless to worry about such an issue since there are strict regulatory measures set up to evaluate any possibility of GM foods evoking allergies. The International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) together with International Food and Biotechnology Council developed a way of assessing allergenicity in GM foods and has gained review approval from the World Health Organization (WHO) and food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) (Hollingworth et al, p 3). With such stringent control measures, the consumers should feel safe consuming GM foods. Genetic engineering may actually solve the problem of allergies as it is for instance possible to modify peanuts to make their proteins non-allergic or less allergic (Jegtvig, para 7). Why cant people focus on such positives and stop assuming some adverse effects
There are arguments that genetically modified products such as Bt cotton or maize can produce toxins that can harm consumers and handlers. The fact however is that Bt toxins have been found to be safe on humans and animals as they are easily digested. The toxin is however effective on the target pests and this makes the technology superb. The genetic engineers have however been careful to consider every transegene separately thereby leaving the technology almost waterproof.
Regulation of genetically modified foods
The safety of GM foods is ensured by the stringent regulations maintained by credible regulatory bodies. In the U.S, there are several regulatory and advisory bodies including the Animal and Plant Health Inspectorate Service (APHIS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (Jason-Smith, para 1). The health concerns about GM foods are well addressed by the FDA as per the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Safety requirements are set by FDA and communicated to producers of GM foods thus helping them to achieve the required safety standards. The companies have to submit their products to FDA for approval and if a product does not meet the standards, it is not allowed in the market. No one should fear consuming GM foods since all those that are currently in the market have gone through thorough safety assessment by FDA and have been found safe (Winter Gallegos, p 2). If we can have confidence on FDA and other recognized food safety agencies when assessing conventional foods, why should we doubt the credibility of these bodies when it comes to GM foods To deal with potent allergens in GM foods, the FDA has established measures that ensure that all producers of genetically modified foods table scientific evidence to show that the product does not contain any allergenic substance. Failure to produce such evidence calls for labeling of the product as a GM food so that consumers are aware (Schneider Schneider, para 3).
Although controversy has risen with approval of several GM products in the U.S., no harm has been particularly associated with these. The U.S. has approved commercialization of the Flavr SavrTM Tomato, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn, the controversial StarLink corn and the L-tryptophan. Some of these have been found to have some adverse effects like the L-tryptophan related deaths in late 1980s but the risks were not as a result the transegene but rather due to lack of other quality control measures (Schneider Schneider, para 4). This implies that we need not worry of the process of coming up with a safe food product but rather worry whether the product is safe. GM foods in this case are safe but unfortunately critics look into the technology too much and end up criticizing a safe food product.
Those who worry of introducing antibiotic resistance genes should stop doing so since there is no documented evidence of such a transfer. Furthermore, the introduced genes are usually very negligible. To avoid probable introduction of the genes, the genetic engineering field is able to have the antibiotic resistant genes removed before incorporating the gene into the food product (Winter Gallegos, p 5). The question of nutritional value of GM foods compared to conventional foods is nothing to worry about since the products are manufactured to meet the nutritional equivalents of conventional foods and if any further modification is done, this aims at improving the value of the food. The work of FDA and other regulatory bodies is to oversee these concerns and to give appropriate guidelines and restrictions.
Stringent control measures are not only regulated by the U.S. FDA as other countries have even more strict guidelines concerning approval of GM foods. The European Union (EU) for instance is very thorough in this assessment. Manufacturers or importers of GM foods obtain approval from a member state which does case by case risk assessment of the GM food. In addition, the member state gives important information to the EU Commission which then informs other member states and waits for their approval. Failure of approval by a single state means that the food cannot be produced or imported. This rigorous procedure cannot allow health threats to pass through and therefore one should be confident when consumed an EU approved GM food (Berkey, para 4). In essence, regulatory measures and public awareness are the only lacking pieces of knowledge to the public and some governments and the way to consumption of the highly beneficial genetically modified foods will be opened.
Currently, a new genetic modification known as marker-assisted selection (MAS) has come into the scene and this has proved beneficial and reliable as far as safety concerns are to be considered. This technology should give all consumers confidence of using GM foods since it involves using the organisms own DNA to select for desired characteristics such as quality of meat or plant productivity (Schneider Schneider, para 7).
Since no evidence has been documented on the harm caused by GM foods that have passed the necessary regulatory procedures, the anti-GMOs should arise and accept the reality of the potential benefits accrued to the GM foods. Millions of children are suffering from malnutrition whereas others especially in the developing countries die of hunger when a solution is at hand. Imagine of a technology that would ensure that a single food product such as maize containing all the essential nutrients in a diet This would save millions of lives. Unfounded fear of GM foods has posed serious food crisis as well as nutritional crisis.
Many anti-GM food activists argue from a political perspective and not from an evidence-based position. There is no good reason to deny the public access to the highly beneficial GM products on the basis of whether a product is labeled as a GM food or not. The most essential question to raise here is whether it has gone the proper approval procedures by accredited bodies (World Health Organization, para 6). If however people demand that these products be labeled, then there is no reason why they should not be labeled to promote democracy and choice. The ultimate thing is that whether labeled or not, an approved GM product will always remain safe and beneficial with many of them being better in terms of quality than the conventional or organic foods. Were it not for continued improvement in food productivity from as early as the history of agriculture, man could have fallen short of food production culminate his existence.
Conclusion
Genetically modified foods that have passed through the right risk assessment stages are already in the market and are safe for consumption. There should not be any fear while consuming such a product unless you are sure that it has not gone through assessment. It is unfortunate that the benefits of these foods have not been reaped by a majority due to lack of proper and reliable knowledge regarding GM foods. It is the responsibility of governments and scientists in this field to pass the accurate information to the public for us to enhance the adoption of this live-saving technology failure to which world food crisis and malnutrition will persist.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment